DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 16 July 2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 13 April 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Objection to the specification
The amendment overcomes the specification objection. The objection is withdrawn.
Rejections under 35 USC 103: Wang
The remarks take the position that Wang fails to disclose the amended subject matter. This has been found unpersuasive. With respect to the claimed first through fourth regions, the claim has been amended to be consistent with the instant specification. These features are clearly present in the drawing of Wang (see annotated figures below).
Moreover, with respect to the claimed base members and spacers, the claims do not require any specific requirement that would distinguish parts of the device of Wang from being interpreted as the claimed base members and spacer. The following interpretation clearly demonstrates the amended subject matter.
PNG
media_image1.png
950
869
media_image1.png
Greyscale
***note first base member includes the riser in contact with spacer 7 (i.e. recess in base member) and all of 2 above surfaces 6-6’’’’ facing electrode 3 (i.e. excluding surfaces of 2 facing 3)***
PNG
media_image2.png
882
1629
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Alternatively, a new interpretation is taken with respect to Miller as discussed herein below.
Therefore, the remarks have been found unpersuasive and the rejection stands as addressed herein below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 1 is rejected over Wang(CN108091548) (copy of publication and machine translation submitted with the office action of 21 January 2026) (first interpretation, interpreting Wang as disclosing a single continuous electrode) in view of Miller (US pgPub 2005/0139762) or Miller (US pgPub 2006/0255255).
Regarding claim 1, Wang teaches a field asymmetric ion mobility spectrometry (FAIMS) device (figure 1), comprising:
an ionization source ([0014]);
a detection cell (figure); and
wherein the detection cell includes:
the pair of filter electrodes(2/3, see paragraph [0042]) including
a first filter electrode and a second filter electrode (2/3 see paragraph [0042] and figure),
a first downstream-side electrode, a second downstream-side electrode, a first opposing electrode, and a second opposing electrode ([0014] teaches detection zone downstream separation and [0037] teaches upper and lower parallel detection electrodes having “N independent detection electrode pairs”),
a first base member and a second base member that are disposed opposite each other such that to be separated from each other (see annotated figure below)
PNG
media_image3.png
884
835
media_image3.png
Greyscale
***note first base member includes the riser in contact with spacer 7 (i.e. recess in base member) and all of 2 above surfaces 6-6’’’’ facing electrode 3 (i.e. excluding surfaces of 2 facing 3)***
spacers disposed between the first base member and the second base member (see annotated figure below)
PNG
media_image4.png
931
954
media_image4.png
Greyscale
***note first base member includes the riser in contact with spacer 7 (i.e. recess in base member) and all of 2 above surfaces 6-6’’’’ facing electrode 3 (i.e. excluding surfaces of 2 facing 3)***
wherein the first filter electrode and the second filter electrode are disposed opposite each other such that to be separated from each other (2/3 separated and opposite as seen in figure),
the first filter electrode comprises (fig. 1, 2 is shown as single and continuous) a plurality of regions including a first region, a second region, a second region, a third region and a fourth region (2, regions 6’-6’’’’),
the first region, the second region, the third region and the fourth region are arrayed sequentially in this stated order (6-6’’’’) along an intersecting direction intersecting a flow direction of ions of measurement introduced between the pair of filter electrodes ([0042]), the flow direction of ions being a direction from the ionization source toward the detection cell ([0042]),
a first gap between the first region and the second filter electrode is larger than a second gap between the second region and the second filter electrode, the second gap is larger than a third gap between the third region and the second filter electrode, the third gap is larger than a fourth gap between the fourth region and the second filter electrode, the first base member supports the first filter electrode, the second base member supports the second filter electrode, one of the spacers contacts both a recess portion of the first base member, which is located adjacent to the fourth region, and the second filter electrode (see annotated figures below),
PNG
media_image2.png
882
1629
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image1.png
950
869
media_image1.png
Greyscale
***note first base member includes the riser in contact with spacer 7 (i.e. recess in base member) and all of 2 above surfaces 6-6’’’’ facing electrode 3 (i.e. excluding surfaces of 2 facing 3)***
the first downstream-side electrode and the second downstream-side electrode are, respectively, disposed on a downstream side of the first region and a downstream side of the second region, in the flow direction, and are separated from each other with respect to the intersecting direction ([0037] and [0042] and figure), and the first opposing electrode and the second opposing electrode are disposed on the downstream side from the second filter electrode, and are disposed, respectively, opposite the first downstream-side electrode and the second downstream-side electrode ([0037], [0042]).
While paragraph [0023] teaches upper and lower separating electrode is connected to RF and DC power supplies and paragraph [0030] teaches applying different high field asymmetric wave radio frequency high voltages to different electrodes, Wang fails to disclose a first microcomputer that controls at least a distributed voltage applied across a pair of filter electrodes.
However, Miller et al. teach a first microcomputer that controls at least a distributed voltage applied across a pair of filter electrodes ([0093]).
Miller modifies Wang by suggesting a processor to apply voltages to the filter electrodes.
Since both inventions are directed towards applying voltages to the filter electrodes, it would have been obvious to apply the voltages via processor control as suggested in Miller in the device of Wang so as to automate the voltage application to simplify the voltage application of Wang.
Alternatively, Miller teaches a first microcomputer that controls at least a distributed voltage applied across a pair of filter electrodes ([0174], wherein paragraph [0040] teaches the control part is under direction of a microcomputer)
Miller modifies Wang by suggesting a processor to apply voltages to the filter electrodes.
Since both inventions are directed towards applying voltages to the filter electrodes, it would have been obvious to apply the voltages via processor control as suggested in Miller in the device of Wang so as to automate the voltage application to simplify the voltage application of Wang.
Claims 1-2, 5, 7 and 9-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miller et al. (US pgPub 2006/0255255) (first interpretation or second interpretation) in view of Wang et al. (CN108091548) (copy of publication and machine translation submitted herewith)
Regarding claim 1, Miller et al. teach a FAIMS device (fig. 4) comprising
an ionization source (best seen in figure 1, 18 or paragraph [0164 with respect to ionization region 18a])
detection cell (fig. 4); and
a first microcomputer that controls at least a distributed voltage applied across a pair of filter electrodes ([0174], wherein paragraph [0040] teaches the control part is under direction of a microcomputer), wherein
the detection cell includes:
the pair of filter electrodes (upper filter electrodes 20 and lower electrodes 22 see paragraph [0161]) including a first filter electrode (20a-20e or sub-groups thereof together are interpreted as the first filter electrode) and a second filter electrode (22a-22e or subgroups thereof are interpreted as the second filter electrode);
a first downstream-side electrode (detector electrode 33a ([0164]) and figure 5);
a second downstream-side electrode (detector electrode 33b [0164] note for each flow path, thus 33b corresponds to 20b/22b);
a first opposing electrode (35a); and
a second opposing electrode (35b),
a first base member (52, figs. 5 and 3b) and a second base member (54, figs., 5 and 3b) that are disposed such that to be separated from each other and to be opposite each other (best seen in figure 3b), and spacers (56a/56b in figure 3(b)) disposed between the first base member and the second base member (as seen in figure 3b),
wherein the first filter electrode and the second filter electrode are disposed opposite each other such that to be separated from each other (20a-e opposite 22a-e see figure 4 or figure 3b for more clarity),
the first filter electrode (20a-20e, figure 4) comprises a plurality of regions (each individual electrode 20a-20e) including a first region (20a) and a second region (20b), a third region and a fourth region (20c-20d respectively)
the first region, the second region, the third region, and the fourth region are arrayed sequentially in this stated order (20a-20d, see figure 4) along an intersecting direction intersecting a flow direction of ions of measurement introduced between the pair of filter electrodes (between 20 and 22, see annotated figure below), the flow direction of ions being a direction from the ionization source towards the detection cell (from 18 to DMS as seen in figure 4 and better seen in figure 2a, flow path discussed in paragraph [0164]);
PNG
media_image5.png
566
1127
media_image5.png
Greyscale
the first base member supports the first filter electrode (as seen in figure 3b, 52 supports 20),
the second base member supports the second filter electrode (as seen in figure 3b, 54 supports 22)
the first downstream-side electrode and the second downstream-side electrode are respectively disposed on a downstream side of the first region and the second region, in the flow direction (33a and 33b are downstream the first region between 20a and 22a and the second region between 20b and 22b (figures 4-5) in the flow direction indicated in figure 2b),, and are separated from each other with respect to the intersecting direction (33a and 33b are adjacent to each other thus in the intersecting direction), and
the first opposing electrode and the second opposing electrode are disposed on the downstream side from the second filter electrode (35a and 35b are downstream 22a and 22b), and are disposed, respectively, opposite the first downstream-side electrode and the second downstream-side electrode (35aa and 35b are opposite 33a and 33b as seen in figure 5 and 1).
While Miller suggests spacers overlapping with electrodes ([0065]), Miller differs from the claimed invention by not disclosing the filter electrode comprises a single and continuous electrode and distances of separation between each of the plurality of regions and the second filter electrode become smaller in order along the intersecting direction, from a third region, of the plurality of regions, at one end of the plurality of regions to a fourth region, of the plurality of regions, at an opposite end of the plurality of regions and the claimed one spacer in contact with both a recess in the base and the second electrode.
However, Wang et al. teaches these deficiencies as discussed above. In this interpretation, Wang teaches one of the spacers (7) contacts both a recess portion in the first base member (7 contacts base of 2 via a recess (i.e. most left step of 2 is interpreted as base)), which is located adjacent to the fourth region (adjacent to 6’’’’) and the second filter electrode spacer 7 in contact with 3 as seen in figure). Note in this interpretation first base member is interpreted to be the remainer of 2 that does not include surfaces 6-6’’’’ facing electrode 3 (see discussion in claim 2 below).
Wang modifies Miller by suggesting different gap distances between adjacent filter electrode pairs and a mounting method of such a device with spacers.
Since both inventions are directed towards detection devices with filter electrodes, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to position the filter array of Miller as suggested by Wang because like Miller, Wang enables both positive and negative polarities which not only expands the detection range but improves the detection efficiency ([0028]), however the separation device of Wang only uses a single RF voltage and DC compensation power supply which is simple in structure, easy to process and easy to mass produce, therefore simplifying filter device ([0029]). Moreover, the stepped high field asymmetric waveform ion migration tub3e achieves simultaneous determination of multiple compounds, reducing analysis time and achieving high-throughput analysis ([0010])
Alternatively, in a second interpretation of Miller, Miller teaches all the limitations as discussed above, however teaches a plurality of first filter electrodes instead of the claimed “first filter electrode”.
However, Wang et al. teach monolithic electrode structure regions of (electrode 2 are stepped) and distances of separation between each of the plurality of regions and the second filter electrode decrease, monotonically along the intersecting direction, from a third region, of the plurality of regions, at one end of the plurality of regions to a fourth region, of the plurality of regions, at an opposite end of the plurality of regions (see discussion above).
Wang modifies Miller by suggesting a monolithic filter electrode pair having different gap distances between adjacent filter electrode pairs.
Since both inventions are directed towards detection devices with filter electrodes, it would have been obvious to substitute the plurality of first filter electrodes of Miller for the monolithic structure of Wang because it would simplify the manufacture of the product by reducing the number of components and power supplies ([0029])
Regarding claim 2, Miller further teaches
a first portion that is provided to be following the flow direction(portion of 52 following along the direction of sample inlet 16 as seen in figure 3a), and that supports the first region and the first downstream-side electrode (52 supports 33a and 20a as seen in figure 5), and
a second supports the second region of the one of the pair of filter electrodes and the second downstream-side electrode (52 supports 20b and 33b), and
the second base member includes the first opposing electrode, the second opposing electrode, and the second filter electrode (54 supports 35a, 35b and 22a).
Miller fails to disclose the second portion that is adjacent to the first portion in the intersecting direction that protrudes to a position at which a distance of separation as to the second base member is smaller than that of the first portion.
Wang et al. teach the second portion that is adjacent to the first portion in the intersecting direction that protrudes toward a position at which a the second gap is smaller than that of the first portion (see annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image6.png
829
1502
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Wang modifies Miller by suggesting different gap distances between adjacent filter electrode pairs.
Since both inventions are directed towards detection devices with filter electrodes, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to position the filter array of Miller as suggested by Wang because like Miller, Wang enables both positive and negative polarities which not only expands the detection range but improves the detection efficiency ([0028]), however the separation device of Wang only uses a single RF voltage and DC compensation power supply which is simple in structure, easy to process and easy to mass produce, therefore simplifying filter device ([0029]). Moreover, the stepped high field asymmetric waveform ion migration tube achieves simultaneous determination of multiple compounds, reducing analysis time and achieving high-throughput analysis ([0010])
Regarding claim 5, Miller teaches a pair of major wiring lines for supplying, respectively, electric power to each of the pair of filter electrodes ([0174] teaches signals from the controller are applied to the filter electrodes via electrical leads, thus major wiring lines are leads for supplying power to each of the pair of filter electrodes), wherein the pair of major wiring lines is, respectively, connected to the pair of filter electrodes at end portions of the pair of filter electrodes in the intersecting direction (fig. 4b shows leads connecting to the end of each filter electrodes 22a-22d in the intersecting direction (i.e. direction of adjacent filter electrodes 22a-22d). Since the field is generated by signals sent to 22a-22b electrical power is provided to each pair 20a/22a, 20b/22b, etc..).
Regarding claim 7, Miller teaches the first gap, the second gap and the third gap are predetermined such that, when the distributed voltage is applied across the pair of filter electrodes, a first difference, defined by magnitudes of electric fields formed in each of the first region and the second region, is equal to a second difference, defined by magnitudes of electric fields formed in each of the second region and the third region (filter electrodes controlled by a controller via separate electrical leads ([0174]), thus capable of having a difference in magnitudes formed in each region to be equal. MPEP 2114 recites “[A]pparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does." Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (emphasis in original). A claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim.” Here all the structural requirements are taught by the claim, therefore functioning the device to have the claimed magnitudes does not distinguish the claim over that of Miller).
Regarding claim 9, Miller teaches a second microcomputer that controls a compensation voltage applied across the pair of filter electrodes ([0040] note drive circuit is interpreted to be the second microcomputer that controls the bias voltage to provide the compensation of asymmetric field see also paragraph [0152]).
Regarding claims 10 and 12, Miller teaches a memory storing one or more computer executable instructions ([0040] teaches microcomputer, inherently requiring storage and programs to direct control part) configured to be executed by the first microcomputer and the second microcomputer ([0040] and [0150] first control unit interpreted to be the portion of microcomputer that applies the asymmetric AC voltage and the second control unit interpreted to be portion of microcomputer that applies DC compensation), the one or more computer executable instructions, when executed by the at least one of the first and second microcomputers causing the FAIMS device to:
apply, by the first microcomputer, an asymmetric alternating current voltage of a first magnitude across the pair of filter electrodes ([0150]); and
applying, by the second microcomputer , a direct current voltage across the pair of filter electrodes ([0150]) while changing a magnitude thereof during the application of the asymmetric alternating current voltage of the first magnitude across the pair of filter electrodes, wherein the magnitude of the direct current voltage applied by the second microcomputer is changed within a range ([0150] teaches application of both asymmetric RF field and compensation field, paragraph [0153] teaches sweeping the compensation signal over a predetermined range) in which a magnitude of an electric field formed in the first region by the asymmetric alternating current voltage of the first magnitude and a magnitude of an electric field formed in the second region are not duplicative (combination of compensation voltage and RF asymmetric voltage different in each electrode pair ([0161]) results in different magnitudes in each region).
Regarding claims 11 and 13, Miller teaches a memory storing one or more computer executable instructions ([0040] teaches microcomputer, inherently requiring storage and programs to direct control part) configured to be executed by the first microcomputer and the second microcomputer ([0040] and [0150] first control unit interpreted to be the portion of microcomputer that applies the asymmetric AC voltage and the second control unit interpreted to be portion of microcomputer that applies DC compensation), the one or more computer executable instructions, when executed by the at least one of the first and second microcomputers causing the FAIMS device to:
applying, by the first control unit, an asymmetric alternating current voltage of a first magnitude and a second magnitude across the pair of filter electrodes ([0150] and figure 2b shows asymmetric RF voltage having a low and a high magnitude); and
applying, by the second control unit, a direct current voltage across the pair of filter electrodes ([0150]) while changing a magnitude thereof during the application of the asymmetric alternating current voltage of the first magnitude and the second magnitude across the pair of filter electrodes, and the magnitude of the direct current voltage applied by the second control unit is changed within a range ([0150] teaches application of both asymmetric RF field and compensation field, paragraph [0153] teaches sweeping the compensation signal over a predetermined range. As discussed above the asymmetric waveform is composed of a high and a low magnitude) in which a magnitude of an electric field formed in the first region by the asymmetric alternating current voltage of the first magnitude and the second magnitude and a magnitude of an electric field formed in the second region are not duplicative (combination of compensation voltage and RF asymmetric voltage different in each electrode pair ([0161]) results in different magnitudes in each region).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2019/0086363 to Covey teaches in figure 7a electrodes separated by spacers 726 (i.e. each spacer 726 contacts both first electrodes and second electrodes, wherein the position of the spacer 726 may be interpreted as a recess in the first base (i.e. above surface 724a)).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL J LOGIE whose telephone number is (571)270-1616. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 7:00AM-3:00PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Robert Kim can be reached at (571)272-2293. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MICHAEL J LOGIE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2881
Prosecution Insights